When US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld was sacked (I know he resigned but come on) straight after the Republican Party's disastrous election results most felt that this was a gesture that the White House realised that things we going badly in Iraq and that, even though they were unwilling to admit it, things we going to have to change.
We now find out that shortly before he left the administration that he sent a memo to the White House that indicated that he may have had an epiphany and which recommended a change of course including a limited troop withdrawal.
Is it therefore possible that Bush sacked him for recommending a change of course rather than to provide the administration cover for changing the strategy and tactics in Iraq?
We now find out that shortly before he left the administration that he sent a memo to the White House that indicated that he may have had an epiphany and which recommended a change of course including a limited troop withdrawal.
Is it therefore possible that Bush sacked him for recommending a change of course rather than to provide the administration cover for changing the strategy and tactics in Iraq?
Just asking.
Update: the text of the memo is to be found here.
No comments:
Post a Comment